The Dunning-Kruger effect is (mostly) a statistical artefact¶
Gignac, G. E., & Zajenkowski, M. (2020). The Dunning-Kruger effect is (mostly) a statistical artefact: Valid approaches to testing the hypothesis with individual differences data. Intelligence.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Dunning-Kruger Effect
- Recent methodological critiques have argued that much of this pattern is reproducible from pure random self-assessment under regression-to-the-mean dynamics, not requiring a specific metacognitive mechanism.
This sourceUses a Glejser heteroskedasticity test and nonlinear regression to argue much of the pattern is a statistical artifact; supports D16-103 (the pattern is partially reproducible from random self-assessment under regression-to-the-mean). CITATION-FIX: the prime cited a wrong title/venue ('...Is (Mostly) Not That Dunning-Kruger Effect', Frontiers in Psychology 11:570728, which does not correspond to this paper); corrected to the actual Intelligence paper.
- Recent methodological critiques have argued that much of this pattern is reproducible from pure random self-assessment under regression-to-the-mean dynamics, not requiring a specific metacognitive mechanism.
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:8333008aad31 · see in the full table